Note: These last four papers are written by the Editor and refer in particular to the situation of the Continuing Anglican Movement, but they also provide an indication of the way in which the nature of the Church has been impoverished within Western Christendom over a very long period of time.

In the letter to the Ephesians (4:4) we read of `one body and Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling.' In the previous verse we are told to be `diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit by the bond of peace.' This same theme is the basis of I Cor. 12:13, `For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body.' For St Paul, and indeed all the early Fathers of the Church, the defining characteristic of the Church is the unity of the body of Christ contained within the unity of the Holy Spirit. The stark conclusion is that, where there is dissension and division, there must be an absence of the Spirit. The Spirit cannot be divided and doled out in separate bodies, just as there cannot be separate bodies of Christ. Christ is one, and the Spirit is one.

In the first chapter of the first letter to the Corinthians St Paul speaks of the divisions and arguments which were destroying the harmony of the church in Corinth. He notices that the members of the church had aligned themselves with certain individual leaders: `each one of you is saying, “I'm with Paul”, “I'm with Apollos”, “I'm with Cephas”, or “I'm with Christ”. Has Christ been divided up? Was Paul crucified for you, or were you baptized in Paul's name?' St Paul puts his finger on the real issue: namely, the shift from allegiance to Christ to an allegiance centred on particular leaders. Where a member of a church becomes obsessed with the necessity to give allegiance to one individual, or where that individual demands such allegiance as a condition of membership of the Church, a barrier is set up which separates Christ from his Body, and which prevents the unity of the Holy Spirit from holding the Church together. The tragic history of Christian schism is marked by a preoccupation with leaders and an adherence to certain individuals, an adherence which automatically involves the rejection of other individuals. When the Protestants of the sixteenth century followed Luther, they rejected the Pope; for them there could be no half measures. But, then as now, if we wish to restore the unity of the Church of Christ, we will find our unity in the Holy Spirit, not in the spurious unity of a human leader.

When we look back upon recent problems within our own community (a reference to the split in the HCC-WR in March 2005) we can see how one man's insistence on total obedience to him personally led to an unnecessary and distressing schism. The phrase `the mind of the Church' is more than a mere figure of speech; the mind of the Church is the mind of the one Holy Spirit manifesting himself in the one Body of Christ. This is why we find that the early Fathers seem so often to speak with one voice, as though they were actually one person. They allowed the unity of the Holy Spirit to operate within themselves, and they immersed themselves in the God-inspired Holy Scriptures, to such an extent that they became part of the mind of the Spirit.

As I worked on my commentaries on the letters of the New Testament I became increasingly aware of the unity of the mind of the Fathers, and how frequently the same interpretation of a passage occurred in writers who were separated often by centuries and who lived in different parts of the world. St Paul prefaced his remarks on the disunity of the church in Corinth with an appeal for unity, `I beg you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all say the same things and that there should be no divisions amongst you, but that you be joined together in the same mind and the same judgment.' This expressed need for the same mind among Christians is not an advocacy of brain-washing, but rather a recognition of the supremacy and power of the one Holy Spirit within the Church. We are not expected to stop thinking but rather to allow the free Spirit to dispel the rigid obsessions of our tiny minds.

3. DIVISION: A year later it became obvious that the text of the Affirmation could not by itself hold the ‘Continuers’ together. A draft Constitution had been prepared which proved unacceptable to various sections of the Continuing movement. The failure to achieve an enduring unity led in different ways to the establishment of a number of Continuing Anglican Jurisdictions some of which have now maintained themselves for many years. The problem was not so much with the text of the Affirmation as that a common understanding of its purpose was lacking

“We gather as people called by God to be faithful and obedient to Him. As the Royal Priestly People of God, the Church is called to be, in fact, the manifestation of Christ in and to the world. True religion is revealed to man by God. We cannot decide what is truth, but rather (in obedience) ought to receive, accept, cherish, defend and teach what God has given us. The Church is created by God and is beyond the ultimate control of man.

5. THE STATEMENT CONSIDERED: The Affirmation does not take the nature of the Church for granted. The position of the statement indicates the importance attached to ecclesiology, that is, the doctrinal model of the Church. Nevertheless the statement is less clear than its prominent position requires. Two important definitions need to be examined:

Although the important concepts ‘the manifestation of Christ’ and ‘the Body of Christ’ are found in these two quotations, both are qualified by the notion ‘in’ or ‘to’ the world. In other words the Church might be a sacrament manifested through a structure, or it might be a structure administering Christian doctrine and sacraments. (I use these two definitions because they are explained in a companion paper, The Standard Western Church.) These differing interpretations of the statement create an ambiguity. In simple terms it is a question whether the Church is primarily sacrament or primarily structure.

The second doctrinal section, ‘The Essentials of Truth and Order’, contains ten statements designed to correct and replace the errors which characterise contemporary mainline Anglicanism. Anglicanism, historically speaking, has always played a corrective role, whether as restoring a more primitive and authentic form of the Faith against the errors of the Western Church of the Middle Ages, or as reintroducing Catholic(?) truth against Protestant inadequacies. Because this role assumes that the Church is a structure answerable for its administration of doctrine and sacraments, the structure model comes naturally to Anglicans.

7. ORGANISATION AND DIVISION: Wherever and whenever the structure model of the Church is uppermost, there is potential for division. This is a lesson writ large in the history of Continuing Anglicanism. The theoretical unity created by the Affirmation was soon shattered. The Continuing Movement had fallen victim to its own past history. By the end of the Nineteenth Century Anglicanism was already sharply divided into three parties: Evangelical, Anglo-Catholic and Liberal. The maintenance of unity among these three involved doctrinal compromise. For Continuing Anglicanism doctrinal compromise threatened to lead back into the contemporary mainline Anglican situation. There had to be a boundary beyond which a Continuing Church must not stray; the Affirmation was itself a product of this need. Even with a boundary in place, Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic attitudes and assumption remain sufficiently strong to create division; such division can be greatly aggravated by ecclesiastical politics.

“Where Christ is, there is the Catholic Church (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Smyrnaeans VIII). This Church acknowledges that the Catholic Church (of which it is itself a manifestation) is the sacramental Body of Christ. Through the Holy Spirit, abiding for all time in the Church, Christ bestows His Risen and Saving Life upon His Holy People. The Catholic Church is both distinguishable and inseparable from her Lord.” from Canon Title I:3 of the Constitutional Canons of the Holy Catholic Church -Western Rite. The Canon is fully in line with the teaching of the Affirmation of St Louis.

9. FAILURE? Although the HCC-WR adopted the sacrament model, further division took place. The reason for this failure was the persisting attachment to the structure model on the part of the former leadership. Until the 2005 Synod of Bishops in Columbia the effectiveness of the sacrament model remained to be demonstrated.

10. A WIDER CONTEXT: It is now time to set this whole matter in a far wider context. This is best addressed in the next paper ‘The Standard Western Church’. The paper deals with the origins of the hiatus in relationships between the eastern and western halves of Christendom, changing massively the former landscape of undivided Christendom. This is a development of exceptional importance for understanding the course of Church history in the whole of Western Christendom - including the Continuing Anglican movement.

11. THE TRANSFORMATION’ OF CHRISTIANITY: ‘The Standard Western Church’ paper is indebted to the work of a Roman Catholic scholar, Professor Isnard Wilhelm Frank O.P. of the University of Mainz, who has described the transformation of the Christianity in the West. This transformation took the form of a radical change in the model of the Church from sacrament to structure. It had its beginnings from about the sixth century onward among the pagan converts to Christianity in north-west Europe. It took over the Roman Patriarchate in the eleventh century, creating a centralised papal Church. At the Reformation the papal version of this structure model was repudiated, but not the model itself. All the western-originating Churches, despite their great variety, persist in using this same model - as, presently, is the tendency within Continuing Anglicanism.

12. EASTERN ECCLESIOLOGY: The Orthodox Churches of the East, whether Chalcedonian or non-Chalcedonian have never undergone this transformation. In spite of other divisive disagreements and conflicts the sacrament model of true Catholic sacramental (and conciliar) ecclesiology is still maintained among them. It is impossible to read the two central doctrinal sections of the Affirmation of St. Louis, The Principles of Doctrine and of Morality, without becoming aware that this is the true direction in which Continuing Anglicanism should be heading. Time and again Continuing Anglicanism has been blown off course by the persistence of the structure model.

14. THIS STUDY: The purpose of this too brief and inadequate study is to begin to draw attention to the underlying dynamics which have influenced the unstable course of Continuing Anglican relations. These dynamics have been at work over so extensive a period of time and have covered such a vast area of Western Christendom that they are assumed to be part of the Faith itself. As we have seen, the Affirmation opens up the possibility of re-thinking the role and purpose of Continuing Anglicanism and of achieving a true unity.

1. TWO KINDS OF CHURCH: Put as simply as possible, there are two kinds of Church - the authentic Catholic Church and the standard Western Church. The first of these is the Catholic Church found in Scripture and the Holy Tradition of the Fathers, the second is an aberration. It is quite easy to explain the difference and how it came about. This paper, therefore, discusses two different ecclesiologies - two different models of the Church.

2. THE ORIGINAL CATHOLIC CHURCH: The first Christians, following the example of the Apostles, set up distinct Christian communities; distinct, that is, from the civil societies around them. These were not just gatherings of the like-minded. Each community received the fullness of the resurrection life of Christ: each community was truly His Body. To be incorporated into the Church by baptism is to be incorporated into Christ. To be ‘in Christ’ is to be filled with His eternal Life. The structure of the community gives temporal presence and effect to the abiding spiritual reality it contains: in other words, it is a sacrament. The authentic Catholic Church is a sacrament manifested through a structure.

3. THE STANDARD WESTERN CHURCH: This kind of Church developed about five hundred years into the first Christian millennium as a consequence of missionary activity in north-west Europe. It was created through the way in which already existing pagan societies adopted Christianity. These were societies in which the whole community and its religion were indivisibly one. Christianity, with its forms of worship and moral teaching, replaced the previous religion. It was a ‘Christianising’ of an already existing structure. The Standard Western Church is a structure administering Christian doctrine and sacraments

4. THE ECCLESIASTICAL TSUNAMI: The creation of Frankish ecclesiology changed the entire landscape of Christendom. It acted like an ecclesiastical tsunami - except that its progress was slow, almost to the point being imperceptible. Eventually it swamped the whole of Western Christendom - the vast area which looked to the Roman Patriarch as its focus of unity - separating it from the rest of the Catholic Church. It transformed the Roman Patriarchate into a secular papal empire, it created a new kind of theology and canon law, finally, it tore the fabric of Western Christendom to pieces. Like a tsunami its passing wiped out the memory of what was there before. In this way a new and inadequate form of ‘Catholic’ Church was established in the West.

A. In authentic Catholic ecclesiology it is the structure which enables the Church to be Sacrament. The relationship (fellowship - koinônia) of the bishop with his priests, deacons and laity creates the conditions through which Christ communicates His risen life, by the Spirit, to His people - sacrament and structure are one.

A. In Catholic ecclesiology the structure is unified by the Faith maintained identically by all its members. This identity in the Faith also serves to unite each local Catholic community with other like Catholic communities - this being the basis of the essentially conciliar character of Catholic ecclesiology. For this reason the fundamental doctrines of the Faith - trinitarian and christological - are matters which will always continue to involve all the faithful. False doctrine destroys the entire fabric and rationale of the living Church. In Eastern Christendom the greatest divide has been between those Churches accepting and those rejecting the teaching of the Council of Chalcedon - a rift which has now good hope of being healed.

B. With Frankish ecclesiology the structure becomes an organisation responsible for both the religious and secular well-being of the local community. (There is no specific church community such as we find in authentic Catholic ecclesiology.) Until the Eleventh Century the head of this organisation was responsible for the provision and preservation of sound doctrine and valid sacraments. The king was both the secular ruler of the realm and the sacral head of the Church within his realm - this is still the theoretical position of the English monarchy. The Roman popes also claimed a spiritual headship over the Church. The Eleventh Century conflict between the Roman popes and the Germanic emperors ended with the popes taking over the role of sacral kingship. In this way the originally Catholic Patriarchate of Rome surrendered willingly, and probably unwittingly, to Frankish ecclesiology and was transformed into the absolutist papal church of the Middle Ages and beyond.

7. THE REPUDIATION OF PAPALISM: The repudiation of papalism by so many in the West at the time of the Reformation did not involve a rejection of Frankish ecclesiology - which by then had a thousand-year history behind it. The Churches of the Reformation established various forms of church government to replace papalism. The Anglican instinct, for example, was to preserve the Catholic ministries of bishops, priest, and deacons which Frankish ecclesiology had also been careful to preserve. On the basis of Frankish ecclesiology the organisation responsible for providing doctrine and sacraments could do so only if it possessed the necessary legitimacy. This legitimacy was claimed by every Church as justification for its own separate existence - from the continuing Papal jurisdiction to the most radical Protestant group. In this way every Western originating Church, however distinctive its organisational character may be, can be defined as a Standard Western Church. The common ground is an unreflecting acceptance of the aberrant Frankish ecclesiology.

8. THE SOLUTION FOR CONTINUING ANGLICANISM: For Continuing Anglicans the solution is already available by following the doctrinal principles set out in the Affirmation of St. Louis. There is one area in which particular care must be taken and that it is to identify and make one’s own the authentic Holy Tradition of the Fathers. The ‘Catholic Faith’ as maintained by the standard Western Churches is not always a reliable guide in this respect - it also has been seriously deformed by the ecclesiastical tsunami.

1. THE NEED: The persisting inability of the Continuing Anglican Movement to achieve full and abiding unity is a matter which requires far more thorough attention than it appears to have received since the Congress of St. Louis in 1997. The failure to achieve a true synthesis between the various doctrinal strands which have been inherited from mainline Anglicanism has contributed greatly to the instability of the Movement. My hope in writing this paper is to encourage fresh thought about the issue.

2. A SERIES OF PAPERS: this is the third in a series of papers which include: ‘On the Affirmation of St Louis and Continuing Anglicanism’, ‘The Standard Western Church’, and ‘Uniting in the Divine reality’. These papers will together give some understanding of the solution available and the very long-standing aberration which makes the full acceptance of that solution so difficult for ‘traditionalist Anglicans’.

4. The growth of a ‘Tractarian’ movement drawing attention to the affinities of Anglicanism with the pre-Reformation Church. The movement began later to adopt the liturgical styles and pastoral practices of the contemporary Roman Church. The ensuing conflict with the Evangelicals brought about a polarisation between ‘Protestant’ and ‘Catholic’ Anglicanism, together with a substantial middle ground uncommited to either party.

5. LIVE AND LET LIVE: Although these strands are distinguished in the scheme above they have, in practice, intermingled and influenced each other, producing a ‘live and let live’ approach characteristic of Anglicanism. The exception has been the determination on the part of the aggressively liberal element mentioned above to dominate Anglicanism and re-mould it according to its own agenda.

6. STRANDS OR SYSTEMS? The way in which aggressive liberalism has succeeding in polarising and severely damaging the Anglican Communion reveals the underlying mechanism by which Anglicanism has hitherto survived as a distinct ecclesial body. The various strands we have detected in Anglicanism are, in fact, systems of doctrine. These systems are frequently incompatible and one only has to reflect on the way the Calvinistic teaching on Predestination became a source of conflict in the past to see that this is so.

8. A SYSTEM UNLEASHED: Aggressive liberalism is an example of a system unleashed. It is determined to impose its own agenda on the Anglican communion and has found in the democratic systems of government adopted by many Anglican provinces a means of pursuing and achieving its aims. The reason why liberalism of this type has become so militant is not only explained by the desire to emulate contemporary secular society, there is a greater necessity imposed by the ecclesiology which it has inherited from the distant past.

9. THE ECCLESIOLOGICAL NECESSITY: The necessity is contained in the definition: The Church is a structure administering Christian doctrine and sacraments. This definition, described as Frankish ecclesiology or the structure model, is explained further in the previous paper ‘The Standard Western Church’. Under this definition the doctrinal system adopted by a particular group as being the authentic doctrine of the Church is the only one which, in the eyes of that group, justifies the very existence of the Church itself.

7. TAMING THE SYSTEMS: By treating all such systems as no more than strands the Anglican Communion has managed, so far, to hold together. The Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral is an example of this desire to find a comprehensive doctrinal formula broad enough to enable the competing systems to co-exist within one structure. This is a synthesis built on an inadequate ecclesiology, while episcopal government of the Church provides a framework in which this synthesis can survive - for the present, at least.

10. NECESSITY AND DISUNION: The present Anglican Communion has persisted in maintaining a doctrinal synthesis, the consequence of an aberrant ecclesiology, which contains the seeds of its own destruction. At present Continuing Anglicanism has tended to do the same - and its failure to remain a united whole suggests that this is the case. The website Anglicans Online lists more than fifty Anglican Churches not in communion with Canterbury. Some of these are national extensions of the same Church, some are substantial Churches, but the great variety indicates a failure nevertheless. In one way or another these Churches are convinced of the necessity of maintaining a separate existence and this will be due largely to the retention of this aberrant Frankish ecclesiology.

11. THE AFFIRMATION OF ST LOUIS: The Affirmation contains in its Principles of Doctrine a concentrated, but fully inclusive, summary of doctrine entirely consistent with the Faith of the undivided Catholic Church. The summary includes two important ecclesiological definitions. The paper ‘On the Affirmation of St Louis and Continuing Anglicanism’ discusses possible ways of interpreting these definitions and concludes that the influence of the inherited Frankish ecclesiology has made it difficult for Continuing Anglicans to interpret them correctly. The Affirmation is actually saying that The authentic Catholic Church is a sacrament manifested through a structure. The persisting disunion of continuing Anglicanism is the consequence of following the Frankish structure model rather than the Catholic sacrament model required by The Affirmation.

13. COMPARING STATEMENTS: If we recall two important historical statements which have been used to define Anglicanism in the past, we can see that the Thirty-Nine Articles intend to define a doctrinal system for a Church of the structure type. Although the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral appears to be totally different, it assumes the same Frankish model but tries to avoid its divisive consequences by deploying only the most general doctrinal statements. In complete contrast The Affirmation of St Louis, insists that the Church is indeed the sacramental Body of Christ - this is authentic Catholic ecclesiology.

14. A REVOLUTIONARY DOCUMENT? For this reason the Affirmation, which appears to endorse ‘traditional’ Anglicanism, understood as the persistence of past historical forms, is opening up a new pathway by which a true and abiding synthesis may be achieved. In terms of past Anglican history it is indeed revolutionary, but not so when set against the background of the undivided Catholic Church. The Affirmation re-asserts the total unity of the Catholic Church in Christ, its Lord and its Life, through the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit. It invites all Continuing Anglicans to renew their own particular commitment to Christ in a greater and more fulfilling synthesis than they can ever experience in separation.

1. REALITY: However much we discuss the unity of the Church, it is necessary to keep in mind the ultimate purpose for which the Church has been established by Our Lord. This paper is the fourth in the series exploring the influence of Frankish ecclesiology on the Churches of Western Christendom. Such an investigation cannot be treated without reference to the Divine Reality. What is involved here is the direct personal consciousness of God as both the Creator and the Giver of Purpose to His creation, who Himself remains the fulfilment of that purpose beyond the boundary of creation - this is the true and final reality, the Way of eternal salvation.

2. THE WAY OF SALVATION: The disputes and divisions of the Reformation period were set against a background of a conscious need for eternal salvation. Those who stayed faithful to the papacy regarded the papal Church as the means appointed by Christ Himself to proclaim and minister that salvation: The Reformers regarded the papal Church of their day as the chief obstacle for mankind in the way of gaining the salvation revealed in the Scriptures.

3. ECCLESIOLOGY AND DOCTRINE: In the earlier papers in this series an aberration was identified, the Frankish ecclesiology, which presented the Church as a structure administering Christian doctrine and sacraments. This aberration has prevailed throughout the great variety of Western originating Churches, either locking them into particular doctrinal systems or overturning all such systems in favour of newly constructed versions of Christianity. Under the influence of Frankish ecclesiology the Papalist and Protestant versions of the Faith became mutually exclusive systems. Modern ‘ecumenism’ has attempted to create syntheses between these conflicting systems without recognising the root problem created by Frankish ecclesiology.

4. DISUNION AND CONTINUING ANGLICANISM: An earlier paper in this series, ‘Towards a synthesis’ identified various strands within the post-Reformation English Church which developed into two basic approaches, Anglo-Catholic and Evangelical. These, though mutually opposed to radical liberalism, remain in a state of unresolved conflict. This conflict has been inherited by the Continuing Anglican movement. Divisions are often put down to personal rivalries and ambitions among the various leaderships, but, although this may be so, the divisions retain within them an element of deeper conviction.

5. THE CATHOLIC CONVICTION: Anglo-Catholicism sees the continuity of the Church from the time of the Apostles as the guarantee of saving communion (koinônia) with Christ. This conviction contains an essential truth: the Church is itself a sacrament manifested through a structure. Christ himself, through the Holy Spirit, abides continuously and directly in the Church as His Body. The Church is structured in such a way that its sacramental ministry draws those who commit themselves to Christ as their Lord and Saviour into His Body and into direct participation in the His Life. It is through the varied and distinct Spirit-given ministries among its members that the Church is enabled to be the sacramental Body of Christ. (See the Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter Four.)

6. DIVERGENCE: This same conviction of the nature of the Church as koinônia characterised all Catholic Churches until, in Western Christendom and under the influence of Frankish ecclesiology, the Roman Patriarchate re-invented itself as a structure maintaining Christian doctrine and sacraments. Under such an influence the structure ceases to be a koinônia in which all members have a ministry to fulfill and becomes instead a pyramid of responsibility. In the papalist system this pyramid of responsibility is summed up in the Bishop of Rome as the sole source and guarantor of true doctrine and valid sacraments for the entire Christian community on earth. Even when papalism was repudiated by large sections of the Western Church the influence of Frankish ecclesiology together with its consequences persisted among all Western-originating Churches.

7. THE EVANGELICAL CONVICTION: The Protestant conviction is that on the authority of the Scriptures all believers can achieve a direct saving relationship with Christ. Fundamental to receiving this saving relationship is the individual believer’s act of repentance and faith toward Christ, together with a personal commitment to Him. It is this process of repentance, faith and commitment which validates the sacramental acts of the Church, notably Baptism and Eucharist. This personal conversion opens up for the individual a new pattern of relationships with others likewise committed to Christ as God and Saviour - hence the Church in its earthly dimension is perceived as “a congregation (Lat. coetus) of faithful men in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly administered ...”.

8. CONVICTIONS BECOME SYSTEMS: According to Frankish ecclesiology the Church ceases to be the Church if it fails to maintain true doctrine and administer valid sacraments. As a consequence the differing convictions, Anglo-Catholic and Evangelical, become systems which define the Church. However much the two parties may agree to differ in order to remain within the same Church, such a Church can never be the authentic Catholic Church.

9. UNITING IN THE DIVINE REALITY: The resolution of the problem outlined above is straightforward. Frankish ecclesiology must be identified for what it is and replaced by the authentically Catholic ecclesiology - the ecclesiology of Ephesians Chapter Four. Here personal commitment to Christ is also commitment to His Body, manifested sacramentally in the Apostolic structure of the Church as koinônia with the Holy Trinity and with our fellow believers. In this way our unity in the Divine Reality stands out more clearly than ever before.

10. THE AFFIRMATION OF ST LOUIS COMPARED: By comparison with the Thirty-nine Articles and the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral, the Affirmation avoids the consequences of Frankish ecclesiology. The Articles, though moderate in tone, bind Anglicanism to a particular system; the Quadrilateral tries to avoid this by being too diffuse and allowing systems to persist under cover of that diffuseness. Only the Affirmation provides an adequately descriptive approach and is justified in asserting that all Anglican statements of faith and liturgical formulae must be interpreted in accordance with them (the Fundamental Principles).

11. THE PURPOSE OF THESE FOUR PAPERS: These four papers have been deliberately repetitive in order to challenge all members of the Continuing Churches to serious thought and re-discovery. The message is simple - ecclesiology, the model of the Church, matters. The Affirmation of St Louis does not take ecclesiology for granted, it declares what is truly the nature of the Catholic Church. It is only lazy thinking which ignores this and carries on in the familiar Frankish way, a way which always leads to competition and division. It is the special circumstances of the Continuing Anglican movement which brings both this problem and its solution into sharp focus. It is the discovery of this solution which provides the special contribution of Continuing Anglicanism to the healing of the divisions amongst the Churches of Christendom.